rtbiscuit Posted March 13, 2011 Share Posted March 13, 2011 There's an awful lot of 200SXs and S2000s gone through hedges on 4 identical high-end tyres thats down to the ineptness of the drivers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tez162003 Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 I would go with 452's, for me it is because I have my 350z lowered rather a lot with silly amounts of inside tyre wear, and for me being a evening tyre fitter/distributor for a company called Alloy Wheels Direct fitting all sorts of expensive wheels I have the luxury of swapping my tyres around whenever. So if i get 452's when 1 edge gets slightly worn i swap them side to side meaning 2 lots of life on the inner edge as there directional tyres, and 912's arent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMR Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 i Fitted FK452's to my Zed just after Christmas and i find the sidewalls of the rears have to much lateral movement in them which makes me paranoid, thinking the car has a slow puncture all the time. The fronts follow every little surface change and have a strong self centre feel to them which also adds to my worries. So much so I am thinking of taking them off in favour of another set of Bridgestones Glad to see someone else has experienced the same as me. Falkens are just too soft for a heavy car such as the Z if your pushing the car in any way. I've been waiting for camskill to get bridgestones back in stock for the Z fitment, as I just can't get on with the falkens. Everyone who raves about them in the stock sizes and profile must just pootle about everywhere and prefer comfort over performance. Also, the whole mixed tyre thing is over exagerated on here like someone else said above.. Different tyres on the same axle, yes, its a no no especially on a RWD car. But mixing tyres front and rear is made out like its instant death for people on here.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 with the falkens did you have the normal ones or the XL, the XL has a steel band reinforced sidewall. big difference between the 2. i can't even bend the side wall of mine with them off the wheel and no air. (thats at a 35 profile though) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMR Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 245/45R18 100Y XL and 225/45R18 95Y XL It must be the profile combined the with Z's weight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 245/45R18 100Y XL and 225/45R18 95Y XL It must be the profile combined the with Z's weight would have to agree, as the lower profile ones i run on the lighter s2k have been brilliant. i run 225.35.18 front and 255.35.18 rear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMR Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Yeah, my friend has them in 40 profile on his 200sx and they are fine. Shame, wish i'd paid the bit extra for stones but live and learn eh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Yeah, my friend has them in 40 profile on his 200sx and they are fine. Shame, wish i'd paid the bit extra for stones but live and learn eh vredestein's or i suppose the reo50's if your set on the stones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.